Milhollan v. United States

Background

A man was arrested after attempting to cash several money orders made out to John J. Leehy, Jr. Police searched him, found a car key labeled “Gold Capri,” located the gold Capri nearby, used the key to open and drive the car to the police station, and then searched the car. Inside a closed satchel in the car they found 22 money orders. The man was convicted for transporting stolen money orders in interstate commerce under 18 U.S.C. § 2314, and he objected to admission of the satchel and other car-search evidence at trial.

Reasoning

The Supreme Court declined to review the Third Circuit’s divided decision that upheld the warrantless searches of both the car and the satchel, a ruling the lower court supported with probable cause and exigent-circumstances reasoning and an approach treating containers in cars as searchable. Justice Marshall (joined by Justices Brennan and Powell) dissented from the denial, saying the case conflicts with this Court’s recent decision in Arkansas v. Sanders, which rejected a special rule permitting container searches simply because a container is found in an automobile.

Real world impact

Because the Court refused to take the case, the conviction and the evidence seized from the car and satchel remain in place for now. The broader question whether closed containers found in vehicles require a warrant remains unresolved by this Court. The dissent urged the Court of Appeals to reconsider the case in light of Arkansas v. Sanders and also noted that the Government’s inventory and harmless-error arguments were not addressed below.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Marshall would have granted review, vacated the judgment, and remanded for reconsideration under Arkansas v. Sanders; he emphasized the apparent conflict and urged consideration of inventory and harmlessness claims.